County Executive Officer Mike Callagy testified for several hours Wednesday in ongoing proceedings that could lead to the removal of San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus, addressing allegations he undermined Corpus’ leadership and was involved in labor and personnel matters.
Corpus faces two simultaneous efforts to oust her: one under Measure A, a voter-approved initiative passed in March granting the Board of Supervisors authority to remove a sheriff through 2028, and another stemming from a civil grand jury accusation filed in June alleging misconduct and abuse of power. If removed, she would be the first elected sheriff in California ousted by a county board.
Callagy spent much of the eigth day of the hearings on the witness stand answering questions from Corpus’ attorneys about his dealings with sheriff’s union members and whether he attempted to undermine her leadership. He acknowledged speaking with union members but denied directly intervening in personnel or labor agreements and said he agreed that double overtime spending had become a serious problem.
Related Articles
Former chief of staff testifies in San Mateo sheriff removal hearing
Union leader arrested by Corpus testifies in San Mateo County’s case to oust sheriff
Week one of Sheriff Corpus removal hearing ends with timecards, politics and emotion
Former aides, colleagues testify against San Mateo County Sheriff Corpus in removal hearing
County paints picture of toxic leadership at second day of Sheriff Corpus removal hearing
“We realized there were problems with the budget,” Callagy testified. “Double overtime was way out of control. It seemed like everywhere in the department — at the airport, admin, at the range. I don’t think that was the original spirit of double overtime.”
Callagy is San Mateo County’s highest-ranking non-elected official, responsible for carrying out Board of Supervisors policies, overseeing daily operations and managing a nearly $5 billion budget.
Corpus’ attorneys argued during opening statements last week that the effort to remove the sheriff stems from when she moved to limit double overtime pay after 9 hours in a work week, a decision they said was necessary because the practice added upwards of $17 million to the department’s annual budget.
On the stand, Callagy disputed those figures, placing the 2024 total closer to $14 million, including regular overtime, and said he signed no agreements without the sheriff’s approval.
Callagy also testified that deputies unhappy with Corpus brought complaints to him, which he directed them to take to Human Resources. The county later hired retired Santa Clara County Judge LaDoris Cordell to investigate leadership concerns, resulting in a 400-page report released in November 2024 that accused Corpus of retaliation, misconduct, corruption and maintaining an inappropriate relationship with her former chief of staff, Victor Aenlle — allegations both deny.
Callagy said he initially approved funding for Corpus’ transition team after she defeated incumbent Carlos Bolanos in the 2022 election, but later grew concerned after learning of her close relationship with Aenlle. He testified that former sheriff’s officials Jeff Kearnan and Dan Guiney told him about a trip to Hawaii where Aenlle and Corpus were seen on the same flight, details of which were included in the Cordell report.
Callagy said the situation raised concerns about public perception, and that he would not have approved Aenlle’s transition team contract had he known about their “relationship.” He testified that he told Corpus the arrangement would have been a conflict of interest.
He also claimed he heard the pair had taken other trips together, including to Lake Tahoe — a statement Corpus visibly rejected by shaking her head at the defense table.
Callagy said he canceled Aenlle’s contract after learning of the Hawaii trip, but Corpus still hired him as her chief of staff after taking office. The county says the position carried a salary he was unqualified for, ranging from $192,000 to nearly $250,000. Following the release of the Cordell report and the allegations against him, the Board of Supervisors eliminated the position, which had been funded through 2026.
Aenlle, who testified earlier this week, said his role was created to bring a civilian perspective and advance Corpus’ reform agenda. He also testified that his family actively campaigned for Corpus in 2022, helping her become the county’s first Latina sheriff.
Callagy also addressed a complaint filed with the Public Employment Relations Board by the Deputy Sheriffs’ Association and the Organization of Sheriff’s Sergeants over training requirements, shift changes and mandatory overtime.
He said the decisions were made by the sheriff but fell to him, and colleagues described the department as “disarrayed” and “imploding.” Callagy said he felt “powerless” to intervene because the Sheriff’s Office operates independently of the board.
In addition to testifying, Callagy has filed a $10.5 million defamation claim against Corpus for accusing him of interfering in her leadership.
The county previously commissioned an investigation by Oakland-based Oppenheimer Investigations into Corpus’ allegations against Callagy and cleared him of any wrongdoing in May. At the time, the Board of Supervisors said it considered the matter closed.
During cross-examination, county attorneys asked Callagy who he voted for in the 2022 election. He paused before responding that, while he thought Bolanos was a “great” administrator, he believed it was time for change and supported electing Corpus. On redirect, Corpus’ attorneys asked if he voted for Measure A. Callagy replied, “Yes.”
Wednesday’s session included retired San Francisco Deputy Chief Peter Walsh as an expert witness, who said he was not concerned about the Sheriff’s Office’s 38 pending investigations, concerns about which had been raised by a former professional standards bureau staffer during the hearings, as long as they stayed within the typical one-year timeframe.
After the hearings, retired Judge James Emerson, who has been tasked with overseeing the proceedings, has 45 days to issue a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. The board then has 30 days to vote – removal requires a four-fifths vote and takes effect immediately. Under the county charter, supervisors have 30 days to appoint a replacement or call a special election. If they fail to act within the prescribed period, the county elections office must schedule one.
